Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Alfred

United States District Court, D. Colorado

December 17, 2018

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
MELVIN ROSHARD ALFRED, Defendant.

          ORDER

          PHILIP A. BRIMMER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         This matter comes before the Court on defendant Melvin Roshard Alfred's Motion for Revocation of Detention Order [Docket No. 17], wherein the defendant asks the Court to review the detention order and release Mr. Alfred on conditions. The United States has filed a response [Docket No. 24].

         The defendant was arrested on September 17, 2018 in the Southern District of Texas based on the criminal complaint in this case alleging that the defendant violated 18 U.S.C. § 2422(a). On September 20, 2018, the defendant had a detention hearing in front of Magistrate Judge Peter Bray. See Docket No. 17-1. After a hearing at which the defendant was represented by counsel and at which FBI Special Agent Robert Spivey and Jeanette Alfred Andrews (the defendant's mother) testified, Judge Bray found that the United States had shown by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant was a danger to the community and found by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant was a flight risk. Docket No. 7 at 34.

         Defendant seeks revocation of the magistrate judge's detention order under 18 U.S.C. § 3145(b) on the grounds that the United States failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is a danger to the community and that he poses a risk of non-appearance. Docket No. 17 at 1.

         Requirements for Detention Under the Bail Reform Act

          Under the Bail Reform Act, a defendant may be detained pending trial only if a judicial officer finds “that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required and the safety of any other person and the community.” 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e). The government bears the burden of proof at a detention hearing. Id. The government must prove risk of flight by a preponderance of the evidence and must prove dangerousness to any person or to the community by clear and convincing evidence. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f).

         In deciding whether there are conditions of release that would assure the appearance of the defendant and the safety of the community, the magistrate judge must consider the following factors:

(1) the nature and circumstances of the offense charged, including whether the offense is a crime of violence, a violation of section 1591, a Federal crime of terrorism, or involves a minor victim or a controlled substance, firearm, explosive, or destructive device;
(2) the weight of the evidence against the person;
(3) the history and characteristics of the person, including --
(A) the person's character, physical and mental condition, family ties, employment, financial resources, length of residence in the community, community ties, past conduct, history relating to drug or alcohol abuse, criminal history, and record concerning appearance at court proceedings; and
(B) whether, at the time of the current offense or arrest, the person was on probation, on parole, or on other release pending trial, sentencing, appeal, or completion of sentence for an offense under Federal, State, or local law; and
(4) the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or the community that would be posed by the person's release.

         The standard for the district court's review of a magistrate judge's detention order under Section 3145(a) is de novo. United States v. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.